Jokes like “Chuck Norris is able to slam a revolving door.”
Anyway, I “built” this stupid app when I was like 13, copy-pasted like 300 jokes in there and a random one would show every time you tapped the screen.
Chuck Norris ’s estate blocked the app from going live. I wish I had printed that rejection out and framed it.
For the first time in over a decade he was suddenly relevant in a way. People remembered he existed, and they were playing off his tough guy image.
And what did he do? Try and shut it down and start suing people. Stupid.
It took him a couple of years to come around to it. If it wasn’t for those jokes would he be remembered anywhere as well? Or would he be a much more obscure celebrity by now?
You underestimate how popular Walker, Texas Ranger was. It wasn't pulling ratings like Seinfeld, ER, or Friends, but it was a solid primetime staple for almost a decade.
I never watched it myself, but the 50+ demo loved it.
It was big internationally. But the jokes made Norris known to a whole different generation than the one watching WTR.
Same with Dallas and The Dukes of Hazzard.
Exported media is weird. Like the huge proportion of British/BBC output (usually period, but also often detective in a way redolent of Christie) that is made primarily for export to foreign consumers who think of British upper-class culture as aspirational.
Also, he fought Bruce Lee! One of my favorite face-offs ever filmed, esp in the martial arts movie genre. Not many actors who could say that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlTyJhbTxxo&pp=ygUZY2h1Y2sgb...
"Friday night is action night with Walker Texas Ranger"
Would the people who grew up in the early 2000s, or especially 2010s, know much of anything about him?
I mean how much do younger people know about Scott Baio or the Corys or Candice Bergen these days?
His career lasted far longer. He had big movie appearances for 30 years, none of those people accomplished that.
Norris' first movie role was in 1968, first big credited appearance was 1972, Walker Texas Ranger finished in 2001.
I think that's a hard argument to make.
Candace Bergen's career was just as long. Her first movie role was 1966, she was nominated for an Oscar in 1979, and she was on a popular sitcom from 1988 to 1998 that won her five Emmies and attracted national commentary after criticism from the Vice President.
I was a kid in the 80s and 90s and to me even then Chuck Norris was a B-movie self-parody joke character. He was not an A-list "action star" in the sense that Schwarzenneger, Stallone, or even Van Damme were.
Those who cared would/will know him regardless. But obviously those people would be relatively few and far apart.
Isn't that an obligation when you own a trademark? That you sue people, or else you may lose the trademark?
It's not quite as cut and dry as you suggest. Besides, in which way was a trademark being violated? Last I knew merely talking about and referencing a celebrity by name was not a trademark violation.
His round kick, Walker Texas Ranger and his fight with Bruce Lee. In Africa, to this day, some TV channels still play his stuff.
You’re assuming the jokes make people dive deeper. In reality I know the jokes and didn’t have a clue who he was and never cared enough to find out. The reality is the probably didn’t make much of a difference to how well he or his work was actually known.
Not that they actually know about him past the tough guy persona of the jokes.
https://github.com/faker-ruby/faker/blob/main/lib/locales/en...
I'm curious on what grounds they blocked the app.
The app probably used his pictures or his name, which are easy candidates for copyright or trademark-claims.
Facts and copyright is an interesting one, because I'm surprised a fact can be copyrighted, unless it's the wording specifically.
As far as copywriting facts, are you really under the impression that Chuck Norris is the only man who can factually slam a revolving door? :)
The only one I remember offhand:
"Chuck Norris doesn't do pushups, he pushes the world down."
Seeing my dad, who grew up on these actors' action flicks, laugh himself to tears when Chuck Norris appears is one of my favourite memories.
I remember reading 'The Vinci Code' in college which was very popular those days and getting a SMS from a friend almost the same day, "Rajnikanth gave Monalisa that smile!".
This was like 2005-2006
I bet Vin wouldn't have blocked your app.
Seeing the youthful spirit run headfirst into the corprocracy of locked down devices and app stores is depressing. Twenty years ago you would have made a webapp or flash animation, most likely avoided scrutiny and not even been shaken down. Thirty years ago you would have made a QBasic program and floppy/email/dcc it to your friends, completely illegible to the corprocracy. But these days simply trying to publish through the common channels, and you're immediately subject to restrictions made for businesses.
Most of the original funny Chuck Norris facts were from the original Vin Diesel ones.
I will have to steal this one for my upcoming valedictorian speech.
The crowd is going to love it.
https://markloveshistory.com/2018/01/06/death-had-to-take-ro...
Historian, sheriff, war hero, governor, explorer, and a successful President who reshaped America largely for the better. While Roosevelt was human, he led a life that very few have ever matched.
That said, the line does fit them both.
It is funny because you usually think of Death as something inevitable and people just accept it but then ... some of these guys put up a fight. Mega-LMAO!
I don’t age. I level up.
I’m 86 today! Nothing like some playful action on a sunny day to make you feel young. I’m grateful for another year, good health and the chance to keep doing what I love. Thank you all for being the best fans in the world. Your support through the years has meant more to me than you’ll ever know.
God Bless,
Chuck Norris?
Case in point: https://theonion.com/hijackers-surprised-to-find-selves-in-h...
And, as you say, in Chuck Norris' case, it's virtually obligatory.
On a personal level, I couldn't agree more. I do hope that culturally we get to that point at some time :-)
It's been a long time since I read it, but didn't the current Death decide to retire and pass the role on?
RIP dude, we’d continue the jokes, may your soul laughs as hard as we do.
Chuck Norris once bet 42 is a prime. He won.
They were obviously a bit more niche, but that made them funnier to my mind.
> For Bruce Schneier, all zeros of the Riemann zeta function are trivial.
https://htmhell.dev/adventcalendar/2024/20/ (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42468318)
One of my favorites.
Chuck Norris jumped into a lake. Chuck Norris didn't get wet. The lake got Chucked.
It's funny for a while, in measured amounts, and then it becomes tiresome.
Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan were in a completely different league.
I assume that most of the people here aren't considering becoming a homophobe because they think the chuck norris jokes are funny.
And in spite of his flaws, it's possible that he had some good qualities as well, or at least aspired to them. So maybe those other qualities were what he looked for in the characters he played.
Of course they both had a change of heart- was it true change or they saw the direction of the political winds? Who knows?
I don’t know Chuck Norris’s views on LGBT. But if he was a self proclaimed “born again Christian” and a rabid Trump supporter, I can only guess. But I no more expect people who were insulted by what he said (which I personally don’t know) to give him more grace or reverence than I do is a Black man who couldn’t give two shits about a dead racist podcaster.
Other people no more need to “contextualize” homophobia than I feel a need to “contextualize” the racism of a dead podcaster.
DADT was a significant improvement over the status quo of "we ask, you tell, and then you get dishonorably discharged". Considering it evidence of homophobia is revisionism. Did it go far enough? No. Was it a good step towards where we wanted to go? Yes.
Sure doesn't seem like a Clinton issue?
It was gonna be law either way; signing it removed a political weapon from the folks pushing its passage. Arguing this is something Clinton did to gay people is counterfactual.
Would you think it was okay if Tim Scott signed such a law just so his fellow Republicans couldn’t hold it against him in the primary? Well actually I wouldn’t be surprised if he did…
It's a pragmatic excuse.
Not signing changes nothing; clear statements that it's bad law; avoid giving the assholes pushing it more likelihood of winning the next election.
Am I suppose to be okay if he signed a law overturning “Brown vs Board of Education” because it would become law anyway?
Was the fact that he signed off on executing a mentally retarded man because it would show he was “tough on crime” just him being “pragmatic”?
https://jacobin.com/2016/11/bill-clinton-rickey-rector-death...
Getting back on topic, I don’t get to praise Chuck Norris because of his anti-racism stances but then dismiss his stances against non straight people.
Less than 1/3rd of eligible voters voted for Trump.
Not all people that voted for Trump consider themselves Republicans, much less MAGA, when MAGA is only 50-60% of Republicans.
So in reality less than 1/6th of the US voting-eligible population is MAGA. Not half.
And that was at the election - roughly 20% of Trump voters now openly profess regret in voting for him, though I don't think we have data breaking that down as self-proclaimed MAGA vs. otherwise. I suspect if you were not self-proclaimed MAGA you're more likely to be open to regret, but I'm sure at least some of them were MAGA.
Poll after poll shows 35-40% of the country supports Trump.
Significantly less than half the country voted for Trump. This is objective fact.
Significantly less than 100% of Trump voters identify as MAGA. This is objective fact.
Approving of Trump as President is also not the same thing as being MAGA, though the overlap is quite likely reasonably high at this point.
You can make an argument that there are more MAGA people than I estimated, but the argument I was referring to was basing it all off of voters for the 2024 election. If you want to make a different argument, we can look at it on its merits.
If 40% of the country still supports everything that’s going on, that tells you a lot about this country. Especially seeing that because of the 2 Senators per state regardless of population, gerrymandering and to a lesser extent the electoral college, they have outsized influence on the government.
Exactly how can you approve of what Trump is doing and not be MAGA?
It is simply false that "half the country [voted] for Trump".
If I have 10 friends and ask them all where they want to eat for dinner and 6 said let’s go to this nice Italian spot and the other 4 said “let’s kill Ralph and eat him”, that still means I have a shitty friend group.
maga is absolutely something to be ashamed of
Can you explain why it's not something to be ashamed of?
That isn't inherently against compassionate care for the rest of humanity. It just means that a government's primary responsibility is to its own citizens and, given that resources are finite, I would prefer my elected officials to secure more of them for our region when possible.
Whether Trump's approach is flawed is certainly up for debate (he's definitely insane and a tyrant), but efforts to "Make America Great Again" are not inherently bad.
(I'm actually from one of the countries targeted by ICE, btw. I'll just be respectful enough not to go to your country uninvited.)
It absolutely has nothing to do with putting america first, it has everything to do with putting trump first. Im afraid you have made the mistake of listening to a politicians words instead of watching his actions. Every word from his mouth is a lie.
I'm not MAGA but it still doesn't stand for those things to me, or a massive percentage of the rest of the country.
> To us living in the US maga stands for...
This is not true. The GOP won the popular vote, centrists see some advantages in MAGA, and even some Democrats are against MAGA without going to the extreme of painting them all as pedophiles and corrupt.
You are in the minority with that opinion.
Or more aptly, you're commenting on the title instead of reading TFA.
MAGA does not mean what you think it means for the people who actually live here.
Rampant abuse of the legal system to target individuals, despite claiming (without evidence) that that was that the Democrats did against them
Total disregard for the constitution
Threats towards the judiciary
A million other things that I can list - but I'm sure you've heard them all and just don't care, so there's probably not much use in me continuing.
America won’t be “great” until minorities, non Christians and non straight people know their role.
Witness the abrupt reversal in public opinion on foreign wars in the last month.
He was a vocal proponent of the birther conspiracy theory about Obama
The homophobia? The racism? The infidelity? The conspiracy theories?
Or just because he was a martial artist and actor that had a bunch of low effort memes?
Terry Crews? Porn addict. [2]
Lin Manuel Miranda "blindly asks BIPOC performers to act in a piece detailing historical events benefiting their oppressors." [3]
Henry Cavill undermined the #MeToo movement saying he feared being called a "rapist" if he pursued women. [4]
John Cena buries talent... used his backstage influence to undermine the momentum of new stars (remember The Nexus in 2010, CM Punk etc) [5]
Steve Irwin fed a crocodille while holding his month-old son, putting him in danger. [6]
Dave Grohl? Chronic infidelity. [7]
All these men are way better than me, for sure. But you can see how these arguments against Chuck Norris are a slippery slope:
> The homophobia? The racism? The infidelity? The conspiracy theories?
You're cherry-picking virtues from people aligned with your politics and ignoring the good things your perceived "adversaries" have.
[1] https://www.npr.org/2020/04/30/847315345/officer-clemmons-mi...
[2] https://www.addictioncenter.com/community/terry-crews-pornog...
[3] https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2020/12/9/unpop-opinion-c...
[4] https://culturess.com/2018/07/13/henry-cavill-missed-point-m...
[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQr5ZD6fr0g&t=3s
[6] https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-47343688
[7] https://www.gutinstinctmedia.com/latest-articles/a-rockstar-...
> Could you give a couple of examples of what you would consider > "good role models for well-adapted men" ?
I'm actually curious.
Supreme court judge, mother of 7, still finds time to go to the gym.
But maybe lets talk about how Amy got called out by The Human Rights Campaign and 185 LGBTQ organizations for her "disturbingly anti-LGBTQ past writings, rhetoric and association with extremist groups." [2]
Or how about when The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights described her record as "fundamentally cruel," arguing she frequently sides with corporations over individuals and shows hostility toward established precedents like the Affordable Care Act.
At least Chuck Norris had no real impact on policy with his bigotry.
[1] https://www.leeboyce.com/truth-the-fitness-life-is-a-relativ...
[2] https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/the-human-rights-campaign...
[3] https://civilrights.org/resource/oppose-the-confirmation-of-...
Sure, there are people that hate her. Her own patron, our Dear Leader, probably hates her when she rules against his interests. All the more reason to respect her.
Just out of curiosity, could you think of one man that could also be a role model for men and women?
Of course, "real men" can be just the opposite, depending on who you ask. So, it's really a subjective issue.
I don't think every man should be like that, but I also don't think any of those qualities are bad. In fact, I think they're pretty admirable.
Do you have issues with the fact that some men conform to that type?
I'd reckon you'd be hard pressed to find a single person that matches every quality/belief you imagined them to have.
I have friends and family who I never thought had a hateful, cruel, or belligerent bone in their bodies, suddenly start acting like totally different people, in the span of a few years. This isn’t me holding them to some purity checklist!
Some of them taught me how to behave!? Did they just not believe any of those things?
MAGA is a horrifying movement.
And the monkey's paw curls…
nit: I wouldn't call it "mask off" though, as if it's been there the whole time. I'd say it's more like there is tiny a kernel of that (and let's be honest, who doesn't have this in some form or another?), combined with a lack of willpower and critical thinking, that causes them into give in to the siren song of easy answers from mass-personalized propaganda.
[0] ancap and religious fundamentalism are the only frameworks I've been able to find that fit the maggot movement, and they're not particularly constructive.
Him liking Trump was a symptom of his regressive, homophobic, and racist beliefs.
A lot of people spend most of their waking hours having to deal with or at least keep in mind the fall out from regressive politics. Asking people to not discuss politics is like asking someone living in fear for their safety to not try and improve said safety. You're asking to not have to be bothered by something that annoys you to talk about in exchange for someone not being able to advocate for their life and livelihood.
Somewhere along the way we lost that idea, not all cultural changes are for the better.
Why do I feel like an era has ended...
Rest in peace.
Yeah, really tough guy.
RIP
Sure, but let's be real: people here are hardly mourning the man himself, so much as a few ideas of him from media they loved, and the cultural impact of Chuck Norris memes from their childhood and such.
He's not around anymore to bolster any hateful messages. Let people have a moment of nostalgia for memories watching him roundhouse kick bad guys with their grandma, or dumb Chuck Norris memes on the playground. That's what people remember.
Films like Missing in Action ,or delta force where the motorbike fires a rocket were just great at the time
I get he had some funny views later in life - but the films were a laugh at the time
However, so as not to speak (purely) ill of the dead, I will say that he was an accomplished martial artist with a prolific film career.
In 1961, in his early 20s. You get ~80 years on this planet to make mistakes and have views that some other people will dislike. If these are the worst things we can accuse him of, while acknowledging all his charitable work, I'd say he fared OK compared to many other role models we have.
https://www.thepinknews.com/2021/01/13/chuck-norris-homophob...
Turns out he was a MAGA Christian homophobe. That’s … disappointing. But I guess I was naive to expect something different.
Chuck Norris doesn't get deplatformed. Platforms get restructured around him.
Just because they hate me, though, doesn't mean I can't disagree with their position.
We know the answers to these questions for Norris.
He was an Obama birther conspiracist.
He thought gays shouldn't be allowed to join Boy Scouts.
He was a big supporter of Netanyahu.
This aren't things that are even remotely in the same ballpark as disagreement. If someone is using their celebrity status to cause harm to millions or tens of millions, I think we can say a few unkind words about them when they go.
How about "Don't be a bad person when you're alive"?
I struggle with that rule sometimes.
Is there one way to be a good person?
Does being a good person also mean agreeing with your politics?
My dad had some antiquated views himself too. People can have/be both, I suppose.
Was it the part where he wanted public schools to force the Bible on everyone's children, regardless of their family's faith?
Or was it the part where he attacked the Boy Scouts for lifting their ban on gay members, because he broadly hates the LGBTQ+ community?
Or, likewise, when he staunchly supported Prop 8, because he felt that the government should enforce strict "traditional family values", and deny consenting adults he doesn't like to marry each other?
Or was it when he said that a Black president would bring "1000 years of darkness"?
Or was it when he said that Muslims were going to destroy America with Sharia law, merely for existing?
Or was it the part where he supported aggressive ICE action against anyone perceived to be foreign?
Just trying to understand how someone this despicable deserves the compliment you gave him. The only good version of Chuck Norris I know about is the pretend version from memes.
I looked this one up. It's true. He's been going out of his way to be a political firebrand and claiming milquetoast Democrats are Satan for decades. It wasn't some offhand comment when cornered on stage. He's pushed white christian nationalism hard for quite some time.
Sad, because it was so unnecessary, divisive, and crazy--a black mark on his legacy.
I enjoyed reading the comments here. RIP.
He made it that far in life, that even if you might disagree with him on all and everything, you would still like him.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/mar/18/val-kilmer-resu...
RIP both...
Also, the grim reaper hasn't yet gathered the courage to tell him.
― Chuck Norris
The section on his Wikipedia page is helpfully succinct if you want to understand the basis of my not joining in the japes and jokes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Norris#Political_views
Chuck Norris facts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Norris_facts
Death finally worked up the nerve.
> #1: "Chuck Norris was bitten by a cobra, and after five days of excruciating pain ... the cobra died."
Which are similar in plot and character arc to
"Man of Tai Chi"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_Tai_Chi
Which Chuck Norris films are also similar?
> Forest Warrior, A Force of One, The Octagon, Forced Vengeance, Sidekicks,
Which "hacker films" are also similar?
Yes, but now I’m like, super suspicious.
(Ok, ok, technically it was Gandalf the Gray and White, and Monty Python and the Holy Grail's Black Knight)
What a load of horseshit. Government is "what we do." It's not imposed by alien pod-persons.
And he opposed marriage equality. What a scumbag.
On the other hand, when eventually the reckoning for this administration comes, would you welcome the idea of collective responsibility?
The thing about Norris is that this isn't just generic policy stuff. I think pretty much all politics has impact on People and therefor matters, but you can abstract a whole lot away on a lot of policies in economics, etc. I think empathetic and caring human beings can disagree on many things.
But racism and homophobia aren't areas where I think empathetic and caring people can disagree, and I don't think those should be legitimatized by calling them political. He wanted to strip rights from gay people and propped up all sorts of racist rhetoric and birtherism against Obama. That's not political. That's being a shitty person.